Allies Voice: Calling 1 million people with $25 to HELP CURE Type 1 Diabetes
Why has the JDRF denied funding to Dr. Faustman's research to cure Type 1 diabetes? Phase 1 has become the burden of proof that the "Faustman Hypothesis" is the frontiers we must explore to cure type 1 diabetes and other autoimmune diseases. JDRF - if you're not part of the solution you are part of the problem! Here's my call to action: Phase 2 of Dr. Faustman's human trials are estimated to cost $25 million.
If 1 million people watching this video have the wherewithal to donate $25 to Dr. Faustman's human trials at MGH - the cure for millions is unstoppable! Do you have $25 to make a dream come true? Please donate to Dr. Faustman's research and SUBSCRIBE to future blogs at AlliesVoice.com
In 1921 the discovery of insulin gave people with insulin-dependent (type 1) diabetes new hope. No longer would they succumb to the demise of lethal blood glucose levels. A new treatment promised a reduction of glucose levels that granted an extension of life with diabetes. Over time the treatment was perfected with self glucose testing and more advanced methods of delivering insulin. Over 80 years later - the world of diabetes treatment continues to be: check sugar, treat and repeat. Is this really as good as it gets?
Throughout the evolution of diabetes treatment the hunt for a cure was never at rest. Within the last few years the hot pursuit for a diabetes cure got especially heated when Dr. Denise Faustman's hit the scene.
When Dr. Faustman revealed her ground-breaking discovery in 2001, most of the diabetes community turned their noses up. Dr. Faustman said she had cured diabetic mice by getting them to regenerate their insulin-producing cells (beta cells). Today Faustman dismisses the initial doubt by looking at the bright-side. She remarks "a lot of groups are working on this now,". "If imitation is the best form of flattery, then I'm flattered."
Having been published in national newspapers like The New York Times, The Boston Globe and the Wall Street Journal, Dr. Faustman's research continues to gain recognition. Scientific journals like Scientific American and The New Scientist and magazines like US News and Newsweek have written about her research. Even The National Institute of Health (NIH) recognizes Dr. Faustman's research to reverse autoimmune diabetes. Even Oprah Magazine recognized Dr. Denise Faustman as the #1 women scientist of the year in 2005.
To correct the autoimmune attack, Faustman injected mice with a cocktail that made their bodies produce a signaling chemical called TNF-alpha. This compound destroyed the defective T-cells that mistakenly destroyed islets. When a surgeon implanted islets on the kidneys of each mouse, the transplants could take root, make insulin and restore normal blood sugar. To eliminate the problem of the bad T-cells returning, Faustman borrowed an idea from the transplant specialists, who have found that liver or spleen cells can "reeducate" a recipient's immune system to treat the new cells as good cells.
Until recently, it was taken for granted that once the beta cells are lost, they cannot grow back. In March 2006, three separate scientific studies (funded by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation) confirmed that they had repeated Faustman's protocols and reproduced her most important result: it is possible to stop the mistaken T-cell attack and when you do, the animals recover normal function. "The results are fantastic, coming from these groups, which were each paid $1 million to spend three years showing that I was wrong," she remarks. "I mean, they were all funded by the JDRF."
With Dr. Faustman's revolutionary research now completing Phase 1, and scheduled to begin Phase 2 in the summer of 2009 - the hope for a diabetes cure is closer than ever. No longer will curing diabetes be a pipedream for the future. Curing diabetes is becoming the one-stop treatment for diabetes today.
Please donate to Dr. Faustman's Laboratory to fund Phase 2 human trials to cure diabetes.
Donations Online
https://www.massgeneral.org/donate/donate.asp?othertext=Cure%20Diabetes%20Now%20-%20Allies%20Voice
Donations by Check
Please make payable to "Massachusetts General Hospital".
On the memo line, please write: "type 1 diabetes research".
Checks can be sent to:
Massachusetts General Hospital
Development Office
Attn: Faustman type 1 diabetes research
165 Cambridge Street, Suite 600
Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2792
Categories: Fundraising,cure,Research,faustman,JDRF,YouTub
Allie,
People with type 1 diabetes and people that know someone with it DO want a cure. It's the pharmaceutical companies that do NOT want a cure. If you just think this out you'll see what I'm getting at. The research that I've looked at say that there are about 3 million people in the US that have type 1 diabetes. If you add in the people with type 2 it comes out to at least 14 million people. So that's 14 million people that have to buy insulin, test strips (seen the cost of those lately?), syringes or pump supplies, etc... If diabetes was suddenly cured there would be very little need for insulin and test strip sales would plummet. They would be losing hundreds of millions of dollars per year. They've been promising a cure ever since I was first diagnosed back in 1972. I was almost guaranteed that a cure was only a couple of years away. Now, I realize that there are many, many people who are working hard to cure this disease and its the people that have the most to lose who are constantly sabotaging the efforts of those who have given their lives to curing this horrible disease. I would love to see it cure because my time is running out. I've already experienced total kidney failure and living on dialysis is like a living death.
Reply to this
The only way to address this issue is to become a member of JDRF's lay review committee, which has power to override decisions made by the scientific review committee. Obviously, the lay review committee did not think this was important enough to to fund it. Instead, they have allocated funds to the "artificial pancreas" project. I don't agree, but I'm also not on the lay review committee!
Reply to this
In today’s business world, the sum of $25 million is a mere pittance to the average corporation with a television advertising campaign/budget. Dave Groves once told me that the POWER of the diabusiness world was enhanced immensely by the very fact that most diabetics can be kept almost at the poverty level because of the expenses incurred to ‘manage’ this disease. Nothing has been done in the last 25 years to reduce the costs of diabetes. In fact, patented insulins, high-tech pumps, costs of disposable items (strips, lancets, infusion sets, needles, etc), and increasing demands by the insurance companies and medical profession for more frequent visits to MDs are becoming almost too burdensome for many (most) patients to shoulder.
I will send Dr. Faustman more than the $25 you requested. I would ask every reader here to encourage everyone they know to send more than your requested contribution to Dr. Faustman. Everyone you contact, related to your diabetes—your doctor, your nurse, your PA, the lab tech that draws your blood, the pharmacist who fills your Rx’s, your insurance provider, your drug maker, your strip maker, your pump maker, your charity, your nearest medical school and anyone else you can think of whose coffers you have enhanced over the years because of this disease—should be willing to contribute.
There is an underlying theme besides the fact that the political atmosphere in the scientific community is more cut-throat than national politics. Just think about Dr. Faustman’s “cure” in terms of so many other chronic diseases. She is being black-balled because most people know (in the scientific community) that their funds will dry up if her research proves correct. This research could lead to cures in other fields, which also means huge corporate/business dollar losses. CURE is not a fundable program for anyone in the corporate/business community. For this reason alone, any diabetic out there should contribute as much as possible to Faustman’s program because it is our best chance for a cure.
Reply to this
Marc points out that pharmaceuticals do NOT want to cure diabetes—their business model goes down the tubes. I also maintain that MOST doctors who treat patients with this disease do NOT want to cure the disease because a dependable, never-ending money-stream dries up. You encourage 1 million diabetics to contribute $25 toward Faustman’s research. Why not ask a thousand endo’s to contribute $1000. We could then separate ‘medical professionals” from “medical businessmen.” I suspect we would hear more ‘crickets’ than commitments.
Sanktpauli (on a previous entry) suggested it is time for a revolution. Perhaps this is a good place to draw our ‘line in the sand.’ Every reader here should call the ADA and JDRF to ask WHY this research is not being supported. At the same time, copy and forward Allie’s entry to organizational e-mail addresses: AskADA@diabetes.org and info@jdrf.org and diabeteswellness@diabeteswellness.net.
I forwarded the above article to several internet journalists—but on further consideration, think it needs to be forwarded to my local newspaper, my 2 senators, my congressman, the Diabetes Caucus, and any other health-related journalists that come to mind. I would point out, though, that one person making 10 contacts (more or less) is not very powerful. Ten people making 10 contacts—even if some of those contacts are duplicative—is certainly more significant.
Reply to this
I agree that the Diabusiness certainly does not want a cure and that patients have to become more active in finding a solution, but I am not sure backing Dr. Faustman's research is the best way to proceed. The immune system of the mouse is far simpler than the human immune system, and the mouse model of human diabetes has long been known to be a very poor imitation of real type 1 diabetes in people. There have probably been twenty cures for diabetes in mice that have been reported in the scientific literature over the last 30 years, so every time I read about another diabetic mouse cure, my eyes just glaze over. The fact that Faustman's own research interests have been drifting farther and farther away from her promising work of 2001 on diabetic mice makes me wonder if she herself still has confidence in its potential significance for human patients.
A major problem is whether beta cells can be made to regrow in long-term human diabetics. There has to be a sufficient foundation of healthy tissue for regrowth to be possible, and that may be lacking in many type 1 patients, especially those with no detectable C-peptide production. The immunosuppressive drug Cyclosporine, for example, is known to cause extreme hypertrophy of the gums in most patients, but in patients who have already experienced severe gum recession prior to initiating Cyclosporine treatment, absolutely no gingival overgrowth occurs. The negative implication for diabetics taking INGAP to stimulate regrowth of beta cells after extensive destruction of the islets is clear.
In contrast to Faustman's work, Living Cell Technology's research in New Zealand has already had successful first phase research trials in Russia of their cure for type 1 diabetes and may thus be a better horse to back in this race, since it is already much closer to the finish line. LCT implants in the patient porcine islet cells in a differentially permeable membrane which lets out insulin in a natural, tailored response to glucose levels, but which keeps out the body's immune cells so no toxic immunosuppression is needed for this xenotransplant to work. LCT plans to start commercial marketing of its product, if further human trials are successful, by 2012.
I agree that part of the disinterest in a cure for diabetes in the medical community is motivated, perhaps unconsciously, by a desire to preserve the 'cash cow' of patients who must forever be managed but can never be cured. However, I suspect that the North American medical system, which reduces doctors to the level of chefs who have to treat according to prescribed recipes accepted by the AMA and the FDA or face loss of licensure, forgetting all the scientific knowledge and imagination they ever had, eventually discourages them from exercising any creativity. You might have better luck approaching German doctors, who have much more freedom to try new ideas in treating their patients and who thus keep an open mind throughout their career.
Reply to this
Using your logic, we should probably fund ALL research for a cure that fails in mice, since their endocrine system is so different from humans. I am being a bit facetious (sorry) and recognize your lack of enthusiasm regarding mouse research. My view has always been one of placing my faith (and dollars) behind the researchers who are leading the program. In this case, Dr. Faustman—not being a ‘corporate’ researcher and more independent in her thinking—at least has the opportunity to adapt and continue on a path toward success. Most corporate/institutional researchers are nothing more than lab rats, themselves, looking for and following any current trend where there are sufficient dollars to keep them in business.
As you and I both know, the cause of diabetes STILL remains a mystery. When you go hunting in the wilds of Africa, not knowing what may end up being your target, it pays to have more than a sniper rifle—which is good for a few thousand yards and a specific target. Many times shot-gunning into the unknown, at close range, will provide ‘hits’ where nothing else affords results. The research you are speaking of out of New Zealand may be the ‘hit’ we’ve all been hoping for. This research reminded me of Dr. Hammerman’s (Washington U., St. Louis) research with embryonic pig tissue, which had provided cure in all animal testing. Of course our government does not allow animal tissue transplants. The aberrant immune system response, over time, may actually prove too wily even for this type of transplant to survive.
You also probably saw the “cure” research done by a Central Florida University medical doctor that used genetically-engineered insulin extract from lettuce to cure diabetes for an extended period of time in mice. There obviously was something more than “just a shot of insulin” to maintain bG’s for that extended period. All of these areas of research deserve dollars and further study. Let’s try to emphasize the fact that we DON’T need a better meter (unless it’s continuous and non-invasive) and we DON’T’t need an artificial pancreas which will go the way of the Jarvik artificial heart. The other day, BetterCell’s blogsite featured this quote, which speaks directly to our needs: “Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.”—Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
Reply to this
.
Hi Love, Marc, Scott, Brent, Melody, Sanktpauli & AnyOne else,
One answer to Love's 'CAUSE & EFFECT' question ...
"... Why has the JDRF denied funding to Dr. Faustman's research to cure Type 1 diabetes? ..."
... is likely this:-
The autoimmune 'attack' referred to in the questionable 'T-cell research' is, in fact, a natural system of adaptative down-regulation of beta-cells that physiologically helps Humans to prevent, for example, HYPOglycemia unawareness, sudden fainting & schizophrenia.
*
www.Relative-HYPOglycemia.cOM
Please email to discuss ... You can find my email address at www.HYPO-thesis.cOM
AnyOne can contribute $25 or more to my 'HYPO-glycemia research', via PayPal, in respect of the abovementioned "HYPO-thesis" that freely evidences a factual CAUSE of diabetes [the HYPO-glycemia EFFECT of which is treatable for less than $25].
...Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) SAT.16.AUG.2008 @ 10:01hrs c/o www.LoveDiabetes.cOM & www.LIFE2345.cOM
"Discovery consists of seeing what Everybody has seen and thinking what Nobody has thought." ... Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
.
Reply to this
Your hypothesis intersects interestingly with what has been called the 'Viking Hypothesis,' which seeks to account for why type 1 diabetes, which is apparently such a deleterious condition, should have been able to develop and survive in the human genome for so long without being weeded out by evolution. The hypothesis begins by noting that everywhere Vikings settled in Europe has today a much higher than normal incidence of type 1 diabetes. It then theorizes that diabetes was perhaps once a survival advantage during times of starvation, especially severe in colder climates, because diabetics would be able to maintain a higher circulating glucose level than non-diabetics at the same limited caloric intake. This would mean that while everyone else rapdily became unconscious and defenseless from lack of calories and glucose to feed the brain and nervous system, diabetics would be the only people able to remain awake and still hunt for food. As long as the diabetes was not too extreme, the only people to survive ice age conditions in the North may have been diabetics, so the diabetes genes were a survival benefit, at least in the early evolutionary stages of the development of this gene cluster, before it became overdeveloped in the modern world with lethal effect.
On an anecdotal level, during the four years before I developed type 1 diabetes, I used to suffer occasional episodes of unconsciousness from hypoglycemia. When I developed type 1 diabetes I began by feeling much better than usual, since the hypoglycemic episodes suddenly disappeared, and I felt more awake and alert than usual. But then I quickly declined into severe hyperglycemia and had to be put on insulin. But I have always suspected since then that type 1 diabetes in my case might have begun at least as some kind of adaptive response to the hypoglycemia, an effort of the body to preserve itself from hypoglycemia by enlisting the immune system to attack the tissues of the body causing it, i.e., the pancreatic beta cells.
Reply to this
I have never encountered the 'Viking Hypothesis' . . . an interesting theory. Together with your anecdotal experience, this adds more food for thought in considering the complexities of diabetes. Thanks for sharing.
Reply to this
If your hypothesis is correct, and you need funds, feel free to approach JDRF, the ADA and possibly IDDT (in the UK). You might also want to support THEIR sponsors, like Cadbury-Schweppes, diet soda manufacturers, and the current (diabusiness) advocates of low-carb diets. Your solicitation, IMO, was insulting and inappropriate.
A thank you to Sanktpauli for his ‘Viking Hypothesis’ explanation. This is interesting, provocative information that would make inquiring minds delve into new hypothetical challenges. Consider: Is a human being an alcoholic if they carry the gene-potential for alcoholism, but never take a drink? Extend this one step further (considering Nick’s hypothesis): There are a multitude of skinny, athletic and highly-energized people who consume massive amounts of carbohydrates daily throughout their lives. These people go to their graves never having experienced a single day of blood sugar elevation (abnormality).
Considering the Viking Hypothesis—did the individuals involved have abnormal bG levels BECAUSE of a genetic abnormality? An environmental set of events that caused gene mutation? Or were they victims of an outside-agent attack on the immune system? The answers, as related to diabetes, are all nothing more than hypothesis until someone can determine the cause/causes or determine the genetic pre-disposition required for abnormal bG’s to occur. The fact that we are chasing symptoms and not pursuing CAUSES is, as Nick would say, “a downline phenomenon that will certainly result in failure.” In other words, this is a RE-gressive rather than PRO-gressive approach, not destined to provide real solutions.
Reply to this
I quite agree that even if true, the 'Viking hypothesis' will do little to lead to finding a cure for diabetes, other than putting us on the trail of which populations to search most intensively for the genes that cause the disposition to this disease. But it is already well-established that the rate of type 1 diabetes is much higher in Denmark than in most other places, which is where the Vikings originated. It is also much higher in Southern Italy than elsewhere, and the Vikings had a kingdom there as well in the middle ages under Frederick II.
The approach of modern medical science is always to assume that the cure for diseases will be found by intensive study of their underlying cause, but this consumes a huge amount of time and effort before any improvement in treatment for patients results. If you thumb through diabetes medical research journals today, you will find almost nothing but basic science research, some small percentage of which could conceivably lead to a cure sometime in the next five to six hundred years.
But we might find a cure sooner by forgetting about trying to understand all the underlying mechanisms and instead concentrating on superficial phenomena which are correlated with improvements in the diabetic state, even without knowing why they are effective. Thus for example aspirin was developed in 1879 on the basis of historical observations that plants containing aspirin-like substances had been used in folk medicine for centuries to cure fever. It was not until about a century later, however, in the 1970s, that the underlying mechanism explaining why aspirin cured fever was discovered. Now if we had insisted on investigating the cause and the basic science of fever first before proceeding to develop aspirin to address it, people would have been suffering from incurable fever for a century longer than necessary. Perhaps there is some lesson in this for how to approach curing diabetes.
Reply to this
.
Hi Love, Marc, Scott, Brent, Melody, Sanktpauli & AnyOne else,
One answer to Sanktpauli's 'CAUSE & EFFECT' question ...
"... When I developed type 1 diabetes I began by feeling much better than usual, since the hypoglycemic episodes suddenly disappeared, and I felt more awake and alert than usual. But then I quickly declined into severe hyperglycemia and had to be put on insulin ..."
'had to be put on insulin ?'
to be or not to be ... 'had' ... that is a question ?
... is likely this:-
The acute auto-immune associated "severe hyperglycemia" referred to in the questionable "had to be put on insulin" hypnotism is, in fact, a natural system of adaptative down-regulation of beta-cells that physiologically helps Humans to prevent, for example, HYPOglycemia unawareness, sudden fainting & schizophrenia.
*
www.Relative-HYPOglycemia.cOM
'HYPERglycemia' is defined by an elevated CONCENTRATION of glucose [EG 110 mg per dL = 6.1 mmol per L] that becomes "severe" as a function primarily associated with DEHYDRATION.
*
http://alliesvoice.com/2007/11/27/todays-issue-how-to-avoid-diabetes-this-season.aspx#Comment
Insulin treatment for dehydration has been associated with 'addiction to insulin' ...
*
http://alliesvoice.com/search.aspx?q=eisenbarth&sc=tconcom&dt=a&al=
Please email to discuss ... You can find my email address at www.HYPO-thesis.cOM
AnyOne can contribute $25 or more to my 'HYPO-glycemia research', via PayPal, in respect of the abovementioned "Gracey HYPO-thesis" that freely evidences a factual CAUSE of diabetes [the HYPO-glycemia EFFECT of which is treatable for less than $25].
...Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) SAT.23.AUG.2008 @ 12:32hrs c/o www.LoveDiabetes.cOM & www.LIFE2345.cOM
"Discovery consists of seeing what Everybody has seen and thinking what Nobody has thought." ... Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
.
Reply to this
Hi all,I have been a type 1 for about 15 years now.I have been praying for a cure for soo long and have been following Dr.Faustmans research for some time.Does anyone havwe any updates on the phase 1 trials? there is no information or updates about it anywhere.Thanks
Reply to this
1967 is a year diabetics can both love and hate. The discovery of C-Peptide, which Improves sensory nerve dysfunction and structural abnormalities (increased SNCV, vibration perception, regression of nodal changes, increased axonal regeneration) and improves autonomic nerve function (heart rate variability)... which Improves renal dysfunction (normalized glomerular filtration, decreased albumin excretion) and reduces diabetes-induced structural changes (decreases mesangial expansion)... which Increases regional blood flow (muscle, myocardium, nerve and kidney)... which Eli Lilly doesn't care about because it was discovered in 1967. They can not file to patent the peptide, thus no profit in doing the research. Normally, it would be right up their street. Diabetics would still need insulin and test kits and then even C-peptide, but no exclusive rights means if they pay for the research, another company can come in behind them, and produce it, cheaper, so they allow the complications.
But never fear, here comes the Swedes! If you have ever read anything about C-Peptide, you will have come across the name, Professor John Wahren, M.D., Ph.D.
This is a name to remember. He is the Chief Scientific Officer at Creative peptides which has done C-Peptide Clinical studies (Stage I and II) and have finally gotten money for stage III clinical study to begin in October 2009. There web site is http://www.creativepeptides.se/ It is well worth taking a look at.
Reply to this
http://deigratia.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/country-wide-motorcycle-trip-to-raise-awareness-for-type-1-diabetes/
Reply to this